Hong Kong Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Loss of bargain

Legal area

Court

22 Jul 2024

TO YUNG SING HERMAN v. SZETO CHAK MEI AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1897
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2741/2016

Although Plaintiff was overall successful in the assessment, he lost key, substantial issues (valuation date and redevelopment basis) that materially increased the length and cost of the assessment; the court may apportion costs for issues lost even where overall success obtained, and on that basis the Order Nisi reducing Plaintiff's costs entitlement to 50% was appropriate and will not be varied; Plaintiff's summons is dismissed and he must pay the costs of the summons.
3 May 2024

SUN’S WORKSHOP CO LTD v. LANGOLD INVESTMENT LTD

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1235
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA94/2022

Master held plaintiff entitled to be placed in position as if SPA performed: loss of rental income awarded despite alleged forgery because SPA sold property subject to tenancy and purchaser assumed tenancy risk; clause 21(d) imposes liability on defaulting party for stamp duty and clause 21(c) did not bar reimbursement because the statutory proviso regarding commenced proceedings applied; plaintiff’s mitigation evidence was adequate and did not preclude recovery; date of assessment for loss of bargain is date of breach (21 May 2021); specific valuation adjustment rates and factors were adopte…
30 Apr 2024

TO YUNG SING HERMAN v. SZETO CHAK MEI AND OTHERS

Citation

[2024] HKCFI 1148
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2741/2016

The valuation date for assessing the plaintiff's loss of bargain is the Completion Date (31 May 2016); damages are the market value at that date (HK$57,621,000) less the contract price (HK$50,000,001) totalling HK$7,620,999, with pre-judgment interest at HSBC prime +1% from Completion Date; other claimed heads (increased stamp duty, increased agency commission, costs of Colliers and CBRE reports) are dismissed.
15 Dec 2023

TO YUNG SING HERMAN v. SZETO CHAK MEI AND OTHERS

Citation

[2023] HKCFI 3112
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCMP2741/2016

The court fixed the valuation date as the contractual Completion Date (31 May 2016). The plaintiff failed to establish a reason to depart from the breach date rule because there was effectively no available market and plaintiff had ceased or did not reasonably pursue mitigation; market value may be assessed by existing use or redevelopment basis (adopt the higher as highest and best use) but specific redevelopment profits and certain consequential heads claimed were disallowed. Interest on the deposit awarded from completion (31 May 2016) to return (24 August 2018) at 1% above prime. Final ma…
25 Nov 2019

WONG WING MAN v. LAM YUEN YEE

Citation

[2019] HKCFI 2848
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA1043/2018

Apply normal measure of damages: accept expert valuation of market value at extended completion date and award loss of bargain of HK$2,500,000; reject HK$3,600 mortgage handling charge as too remote and speculative because no evidence defendant knew or contemplated such a charge or that agent informed defendant, so causation and remoteness not established.
19 Jan 2016

LEE KAM CHUEN v. ING. MIROSLAV KOZUCH

Citation

LEE KAM CHUEN v. ING. MIROSLAV KOZUCH
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2212/2012

Adopt completion date (20 November 2012) for assessment of damages; calculate loss of bargain as market value at that date minus contract price and minus deposit already recovered; award specified damages to plaintiffs and allow interest at commercial rate from date of writ and judgment rate thereafter; order defendants to pay costs of assessment (nisi).
19 Jan 2016

WONG SHUN KIT v. KOZUCHOVA ZUZANA

Citation

WONG SHUN KIT v. KOZUCHOVA ZUZANA
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA2213/2012

The court applied the compensatory principle and, although the general rule is assessment at date of breach, accepted the plaintiffs' submission to use the completion date 20 November 2012 (six days after repudiation) because the difference was immaterial; it accepted the surveyor valuations as at that date and calculated damages as market value less contract price and less deposit, awarding the resulting sums and ordering interest and costs accordingly.
18 Nov 2011

CHAN WAI CHING v. HUI ON YIN ADA

Citation

CHAN WAI CHING v. HUI ON YIN ADA
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ3807/2010

Master held plaintiff entitled to damages for loss of bargain and, having regard to the rising market and the defendant’s retention of the deposit and absence of a defence, it was just to value the property at the date of interlocutory judgment (12 May 2011). Damages assessed at HK$500,000 (HK$2,650,000 less HK$2,150,000). Conveyancing expenses and estate agent commission were not recoverable. The interlocutory judgment was varied to set aside the indemnity for commission and to remove conveyancing expenses from the lien/interest provisions. Interest at 8% per annum from date of writ to judgm…
7 Apr 2006

CHENG HUNG LAI v. TO HING KUEN

Citation

CHENG HUNG LAI v. TO HING KUEN
Court

District Court
Case number

DCCJ4576/2005

The court assessed loss using the actual mortgagee sale price rather than an unsupported valuation report, and awarded the plaintiff the surplus sum released by the mortgagee after deduction of the bank's debt and expenses (HK$159,480.64); costs to the plaintiff to be taxed if not agreed.
25 Apr 2003

FIRST SHANGHAI ENTERPRISES LTD v. DAHLIA PROPERTIES LTD

Citation

FIRST SHANGHAI ENTERPRISES LTD v. DAHLIA PROPERTIES LTD
Court

Court of First Instance
Case number

HCA13426/1997

Defendant entitled to damages measured by difference between contract price and market price as at November 1998 because that was the realistic resale point; wasted conveyancing costs are not recoverable beyond a modest award for resale costs; interest at judgment rate awarded; deductions to be made for forfeited deposit and rental income, yielding a net award of HK$94,957,942.12.